Just Another Funny Coincidence
On September 8, 2001, the LEPC together with the Buffalo-Niagara International Airport ran a full-scale terrorist exercise. More than 350 participants were involved in the exercise that simulated an aircraft landing with a terrorist on board and the threat of an explosive device on the plane. The exercise was a tremendous success. Three days later, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked.
LEPC is "Local Emergency Planning Committee".
Gee, now why on earth would they be running a terrorist on a plane drill BEFORE 9/11???
posted by spooked at 10:48 PM
38 Comments:
• September 10, 2001 - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announces that the Pentagon has lost track of $2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS of military spending.
golly this is not significant in the least!
Move along. Nothing to shill here.
Gee, now why on earth would they be running a terrorist on a plane drill BEFORE 9/11???
Yeah, 'cause... Golly gee. No plane had ever been hijacked prior to 9/11!1!1eleventy0ne!!!
ZOMG INSIDE JOB!!!!
Oh 12:21 duh!
Duh!
What if we simulate 767's being highjacked and flown into the WTC...would anyone notice if the media claims that real 767's are then claimed to have been highjacjed and flown into the WTC?
D is for duh!
So what exactly are you arguing? Full-scale terrorist drills are proof that the drill will actually be carried out?
The quote Spooked cited doesn't even make sense.
More than 350 participants were involved in the exercise that simulated an aircraft landing with a terrorist on board and the threat of an explosive device on the plane. The exercise was a tremendous success. Three days later, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked.
That's like pointing out: "The local fire department practiced battling a full-scale 5-alarm blaze. Three days later, a tanker truck exploded on the highway."
You guys do realize that practicing a scenario in which a hijacked plane lands is nothing like what happened on 9/11, right?
Please tell me you are aware of that.
It's honestly as though this blog is so desperate, its author is just throwing shit on the wall to see what you people will eat up.
there was a whole slew of wargames and drills taking place on 9/11/01, not just the one that spooked referred to.
one involved planes flying into buildings.
the point is that NORAD wouldn't know what is going on - they would see radar blips and just figure that it was part of the drill.
is that why they did nothing?
the point is moot anyway, as no real 757/767 crashed anywhere that day.
maybe that's why they did nothing?
you can't shoot down a pretend ghost.
The point, of course, is that this drill shows that the excuse that the US had no idea what was going to happen on 9/11, and that hijackings took everyone by surprise, is complete nonsense.
Same for the NORAD drills where they practiced intercepting terrorist hijacked planes including planes meant to crash into high value targets.
But the fact that even some local groups were practicing such scenarios shows how widespread this awareness of an impending terrorist attack was.
The lesson is obvious:
multiple terrorist exercises scheduled during the same week cause "real" terrorist attacks.
Thanks, Spooked, for providing a site where it is possible to post about all of the truths of 9/11.
Here, it's possible to expose the fact that there are SHILLS in the house. At other sites (e.g. DU), it isn't allowed and you will be banned for even attempting to point out that 80%+ of the posts there are all written by SHILLS (aka Daisy).
Freedom of speech. What an idea!
Wow. What a powerful indictment. A local emergency planning committee running an exercise that included simulated terrorists before 9/11 when we all know terrorism and terrorists did not exist before 9/11. No Red Army Faction, no Baader Meinhof, no Black September, no PLO, no Shining Path, no nothing, no terrorists before 9/11 so why in the HELL is anyone running an emergency exercise that includes a terrorist organization when TERRORISM didn't EXIST before George W. Bush!!!!!?
In fact, according to Spooky, they don't exist even now.
Frog walk the bah-stards!
Frog march the SHILLY Geese.
Tim McNiven says that in 1976 he participated in a military study related to airline terrorism, which featured the World Trade Center as the primary target.
Check out his story here -
http://www.codenamegrillfire.com
Audio interview here -
Kentroversy Tapes Podcast # 30 (January 14, 2008) (scroll down)
http://www.kentroversytapes.net/
But the fact that even some local groups were practicing such scenarios shows how widespread this awareness of an impending terrorist attack was.
So, in your world then, was it the NWO that was sending out memos that it was about to attack its own country? I'm not quite sure how you reconcile "widespread awareness" of terrorism with "inside job".
It's not as if planes had never been hijacked before. The suprise of 9/11 was that, for the first time ever, they were used as weapons.
The suprise of 9/11 was that, for the first time ever, they [planes] were used as weapons.
planes were nothing more than a psy-op.
9/11 taboo
Move along. Nothing to shill here.
Yay!!!
More YouTube videos!!
How's that new investigation coming?
Oh, and fuck you if you believe the only people who saw the plane were those who saw it on TV. 2 of my co-workers saw it with their own eyes.
2 of my co-workers saw it with their own eyes.
What a coincidence!
My gardener's wife's brother's son's teacher's best friend know's a guy who's dog groomer saw it with her own eyes as well!
What a small world we live in.
Yes. It's much easier to mock something that does not fit into your little theory.
How absolutely inconvenient all those people in Lower Manhattan, Staten Island, Brooklyn, Jersey City, and Hoboken must be to you no-planers.
The TV stuff you can make snappy little YouTube videos of. Actual people who saw the actual planes you have to ignore.
2:18 AM-- honestly, would you mind getting your two co-worker friends to write up what they saw and post it here? I'm interested. Like-- what exactly they saw, for how long and from what distance.
Thanks.
I would if I honestly felt it would make a difference and if I honestly thought they'd be treated respectfully.
But the first word out of your collective mouths would be "shill" and then you'd all proceed to harass, mock, and scorn them all the while picking apart their every word.
2 people, out of the thousands that saw it live, will not persuade with beliefs as deeply rooted as yours.
Sure 11:07, I can't seem to produce the guy's dog groomer witness either.
"Thousands that saw it live"
Sword of "truth" once said it was 'hundreds of thousands' but hey whatever number works for you.
Honestly. Would someone you personally don't know commenting on a blog all of a sudden make you see that what you've believed all these years is wrong?
No.
Hell, you don't even believe the actual video. Why would you believe someone's personal account?
And who's to say what the actual number of people who saw the planes with their own eyes is? It truly doesn't matter to you people as you will write each and every one of them off as paid actors, plants, shills or all of the above.
Honestly, my mind is open on the subject-- and I am always happy to hear new witness accounts.
If you don't even want to try, so be it.
Mostly I am curious if they saw the impact from the south side. Because there was some plane flying around the WTC that morning that I'm guessing most witnesses saw.
But the videos are farked, there is no doubt.
Why they are farked is another, more complicated, question.
you don't even believe the actual video.
which video?
there are a total of 4 videos, all shown on TV, that show a supposed 767 actually hitting and entering wtc2.
all 4 of these videos show the alleged 767 defying real physics.
only harry potter can defy real physics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljegR44iRWY
oops there is 1 video of a supposed 767 hitting and entering wtc1, and not only does it not resemble a real 767 in the least, but the makers of the video added part of the hole in there with a magic marker even as we were watching it.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DopaHxL8zu0
it doesn't matter what any eyewitnesses really saw or only think that they saw because the TV media used phony images to fool the rest of us.
why would they do that?
Honestly, my mind is open on the subject-- and I am always happy to hear new witness accounts.
Really? Your mind is open to the reality that an airliner hit the towers? How many witness accounts have you sought in the name of the truth? How many people who were there have you personally spoken to?
You're a horrible liar. You will never admit that possibility because then you'd have to rationalize why they would fake videos if it really actually happened.
And God forbid you become a reformed no-planer. All the praise and adulation you get from fellow 'tards would be gone.
give it a rest 3:32!
regardless of what any eyewitness saw or thought he saw, the media videos of the event were faked.
Your co workers did see squat.
Really? Your mind is open to the reality that an airliner hit the towers? How many witness accounts have you sought in the name of the truth? How many people who were there have you personally spoken to?
I think it is possible some type of aircraft hit the tower, yes.
But there is no doubt the videos were faked -- ostensibly to cover up that UA175 did not hit the tower.
Really? What type of aircraft hit the tower then? If it wasn't UA175, then what was it?
And please. If there is "no doubt" the videos were faked, for the love of all that is holy in this world, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
maybe it was a paper airplane.
maybe it was a missile.
maybe it was a pre-planted shape-charge explosion.
maybe it was a combination of these or something else entirely.
certainly the few videos of ua175 vs. wtc2 and the 1 video of aa11 vs. wtc1 were faked which means that the entire affair was not what we were all led to believe.
and an explosion is not a collapse so just shut up chad.
comment @2:41 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljegR44iRWY
"this video was removed by the user"
sure it was. it worked earlier today and it was a definitive proof of 9/11 TV fakery and i happen to know that it's maker was proud of it and would not have removed it of his own accord.
and oh ya, shut up chad.
Wow. So we're now resorting to elementary school tactics.
"SHUT UP BILLY!!"
"MY DAD CAN BEAT UP YOUR DAD!!"
Seriously guys. It's a legitimate request. You have the undisputable, obvious, plainer-than-day evidence that the videos are faked and yet you do nothing.
This is hero-making shit folks. Pulitzer prize stuff. Bush's ratings are in the tanks and you're telling me you can't find ONE lawyer? ONE reporter who will take this story and run with it?
You're either ridiculously lazy or completely full of shit.
I'm gonna guess it's a combination of both.
You have the undisputable, obvious, plainer-than-day evidence that the videos are faked and yet you do nothing.
ok chad, what exactly do you suggest that we should do?
Seriously guys. It's a legitimate request. You have the undisputable, obvious, plainer-than-day evidence that the videos are faked and yet you do nothing, blah blah blah
YAWN.
This is getting boring.
We've gone over this many times before.
But this time you really got us.
OK, we're lazy.
Happy?
Now go away.
So that's it then? You're just gonna let the NWO take over?
So that's it then? You're just gonna let the NWO take over?
Yawn.
Go away.
Post a Comment
<< Home